From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net>
Cc: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: pg_dump vs. TRANSFORMs
Date: Thu, 08 Dec 2016 10:03:16 -0500
Message-ID: <4955.1481209396@sss.pgh.pa.us> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20161208142116.GC23417@tamriel.snowman.net>
References: <20160504183952.GE10850@tamriel.snowman.net>
<20161207200915.GZ23417@tamriel.snowman.net>
<729.1481151371@sss.pgh.pa.us>
<20161208142116.GC23417@tamriel.snowman.net>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:majordomo@postgresql.org?body=unsub%20pgsql-hackers>
Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net> writes:
> * Tom Lane (tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us) wrote:
>> I have a vague feeling that the code for dumping casts and/or transforms
>> may have some assumptions that the underlying function is also being
>> dumped. Although maybe the assumption was really only what's fixed here,
>> ie that there be a DumpableObject for the function. Anyway, take a close
>> look for that.
> I'll look around and see, though my hunch is that, at some point, we
> were just pulling all functions and then an optimization was added to
> exclude pg_catalog and no one noticed that it broke casts using built-in
> functions.
Nah, that's historical revisionism --- the exclusion for system functions
is very ancient. It certainly predates transforms altogether, and
probably predates the cast-dumping code in anything like its current form.
I think the expectation was that casts using built-in functions were
also built-in and so needn't be dumped. There may be a comment about it
somewhere, which would need to be revised now.
(Actually, the most likely way in which this would break things is if
it started causing built-in casts to get dumped ... have you checked?)
regards, tom lane
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
reply via email
To: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Cc: tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us, sfrost@snowman.net
Subject: Re: pg_dump vs. TRANSFORMs
In-Reply-To: <4955.1481209396@sss.pgh.pa.us>
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
This inbox is served by DDX for PostgreSQL; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox